Thread: My GDLP has issues...........................

I received my Harrelson Stanley inspected and Harrelson Stanley lapped GDLP a few days ago. I was impressed by the speed in which he returned the stone to me by priority mail with my original GDLP box also returned intact (I keep boxes of razor related things I buy, what can I say?).

The first thing I did is take the GDLP down to my stereo microscope for some close up viewing. That 120 grit Shapton ceramic disc he used to lap the GDLP does dig into the nickel substrate.

I thought it best to post the original close up pictures I took at the start of this thread side by side with the pictures I took since receiving my lapped GDLP back. Here goes:

ORIGINAL CLOSE UP PICTURE OF ONE OF THE SURFACES OF THE EDGES OF MY GDLP PRIOR TO SENDING IT BACK TO HARRELSON

EDGE PIC CLOSE UP AFTER RECEIVING BACK FROM HARRELSON

ORIGINAL GDLP CLOSE UP PICTURE OF A RANDOM AREA OF THE MIDDLE SURFACE

MIDDLE SURFACE AREA PICTURE AFTER RECEIVING BACK FROM HARRELSON


I see no significant visible change to the surface before to after. The diamonds are black or shiny flecks as seen under light while any area that is dull mottled gray is the nickel substrate.

That's the visual. To be fair and comment on what really counts......how does the GDLP perform now vs. then? I only lapped my Shapton ceramic on glass stones since receiving the GDLP back from Harrelson. These are all stones that have previously been lapped flat by the GDLP and have not been lapped with any other type of lapping plate. I lapped my 500, 1k, 2k, 4k, 6k, 8k & 16K. Remember, these all only needed refreshing. From start to finish, it took me 1/2 hour. Part of me feels or maybe wants to feel that the performance has improved a little. But I can honestly say there has been no dramatic, significant or even unquestionably obvious increase in performance.

I did not lap any of my stones using any more force than I have in the past. In no way did I "put my shoulders into it" like Harrelson described the way he laps with GDLPs. Back and forth, back and forth with a few diagonals just as seen on the Shapton website.

My conclusion; I think I personally got a bum plate. Since I'm the only one who's reported such issues out of all of us, I'm comforted in such a conclusion. I'll be mailing the GDLP back to Harrelson, taking him up on his offer to refund my money/return shipping. I don't know at this point what I'll do from here regarding lapping my Shaptons.

I do have a DMT D8C, D8F, D8E on the way from Craftsman Studio arriving on Wednesday. I placed this order before I received the GDLP back. Why? I'm getting into sharpening chisels and plane irons more now, and I have a fair amount of barber hones that I've amassed. I want some lapping plates that I can work to hog steel and barber hones and not worry about if/when they degrade. To test my conclusion regarding the GDLP, I may very well purchase another one in the future. Only time will tell.

All in all, I don't discourage anyone from buying a GDLP. With its recessed surface areas and design, it's a pleasure to lap stones with it. IF....the issue I've had is more widespread (I don't think it is), then it would undoubtedly come to light.

Harrelson and Shapton are branching out and broadening the supply chain for Shapton products. In branching out, part of what he may have stepped into is a user group (razor nuts) different than working woodcraftsmen, production shops, etc. If I was a tradesman using the GDLP as a tool for my craft, I could also see myself leaning hard on the GDLP to get the lapping done and get back to woodworking fast. I could see myself applying more and more pressure until I eventually wore out the plate, then I'd buy another one and not think much about it.

We're hobbyists where the GDLP is at a much higher price point than other plates we can use. I and I think most of us take great care of our razor related tools; baby them really. Owning this for less than six months, using it very little compared to a working woodcrafter and having such a decline in performance means I think I look at my issue differently than I would otherwise. Chalk it up to a fluke plate is what I say.

Chris L

Chris,

I'm sorry to hear it didn't work out for you but at least the offer of a refund is there. And yes, we are a small group of fanatics and some of us view manufacturer and salesman claims with a wee pinch of salt.

After all is said and done, I look forward to your review of the DMT as it relates to lapping your Shapton hones. I'm sitting here, confident of the outcome but I've been surprised before so perhaps I shall leave my foot out of my mouth for now.... plenty of time to shove it in later, eh?

As for the Harrelson comment about "leaning in to it" with the lapping plate, I've been meaning to head out in the shop and do some deflection tests with a glass hone. That thin plate of glass if not supported firmly across the the full length will flex and by a lot more than the claimed accuracy that's been batted around. I've toyed with picking up a surface plate and some transfer dye to see just how flat a DGLP can make a hone , but of course, I don't have a DGLP..... yet. Naturally, I'd ruin the surface plate within minutes of doing such a test as the ceramic abrasive is harder than granite and would thus wear the surface the first time I do a dye transfer test. Still.... it would have been fun... sort of. Of course, this test would not tell me how badly the surface is out, only how many points on the surface actually are on the same plane.

Christian

Regarding the DMTs. I'm probably the first person in SRP history that will have owned a D8C and a D8E......twice. I bought both models early on and sold both after going Shapton. Yeah, crazy, I know, but I never said I wasn't!

I'm sure I'll have no problems with lapping the Shaptons using a D8C; the D8C is a time tested and proven performer for what we do. Stiction will be a greater challenge with the D8C than the GDLP without a doubt.

Chris L

Until I bought the GDLP I used my D8C to lap my Shapton pros and what have you with success and no downside other then the stiction hassle. The stiction makes it take a bit longer. I still use the D8C to lap some hones since reading of your problem with your GDLP. Now I reserve that for the Shaptons only.

If you use only very light pressure, I think that 4 minutes per stone is not bad.
I use some pressure when I use my D8C because otherwise it takes ages. I've never been a follower of the 'weight of the stone only' principle.

Hope you have more luck with the D8C.

Originally Posted by Chris L

I'm sure I'll have no problems with lapping the Shaptons using a D8C;
Chris L

I'd be really interested to know how the two compare in the flatness aspect.

I have been wondering what all of this means anyway. I mean, since the high and low spots will be rubbed back and forth over the stone, wouldn't they be averaged out to a mostly uniform level?

Originally Posted by Russel Baldridge

I'd be really interested to know how the two compare in the flatness aspect.

I have been wondering what all of this means anyway. I mean, since the high and low spots will be rubbed back and forth over the stone, wouldn't they be averaged out to a mostly uniform level?

Congratulations! Give the man a cigar! He figured it out!

Yes, exactly, the minor variations balance out due to the actual lapping motions.... and what little variation is left is infinitesimally insignificant when it comes to using such a surface to hone a bevel that is only 0.075" wide. And further to that, as you use an ever so slightly out of flat diamond hone, any diamonds sticking further out from the surface than the rest will take the brunt of the initial lapping until they wear down to the level of the others. Diamonds below the initial surface level won't wear at all until the other diamonds wear down to their level...

It's what makes lapping work and why a cast iron lapping plate used with loose grit in a machine shop lasts for decades if used correctly as lapping will keep it and what you are lapping flat.

Regards

Christian